I would say that THOG is the most influential martial artist, since he started using rocks to hit people, rather than just his hands, but if I don't back it up, then you don't know what the hell I'm spewing.

Here's the thing- I completely agree that he was a notable martial artist, and he's worth mentioning in my book because he basically single-handedly destroyed the myth of "size does not matter, ever, technique and spirit will always win" to those who were there to witness the mass destruction that Slomanski brought upon the unsuspecting japanese karateka, also kind of forcing the introduction of weight classes. Problem is however, in the scale and reputation in which you're comparing to someone like Rickson Gracie.

Don't get me wrong, I make a pretty terrible Gracie nutrider. But, in my view, Slomanski fails to match up in terms of 1. Reach 2. Public Perception.

Rickson, Royce were at the crest of the MMA revolution, brining their family's style of fighting to the public in mass numbers, changing public perception in terms of the usuability of grappling in a full-contact match. Media (thanks to modern times), general success in the public and private forum, never-ending word of mouth... so much reach, so much overall respect from a large number of people.

Hank, on the other hand, was not covered much at all in comparision (once again, times), and is truthfully, an often-missed figure in the world of martial arts, regardless of the fact that he was thought of as the third most feared thing by japanese people, right after 'Fat Man' and 'Little Boy.' Instead, by a large percentage of the small number of people who know of him, he is better known as the guy who taught Elvis karate. Sad, really.

So no, not dissing the guy, but I disagree on the level on which he was influential.

This is relevant in a karate context, possibly. Some dude turns up at the somewhat dubious pre-Kyokushin karate tournaments and kicks ass. Okay, cool.
Relevance to "Asian martial arts"? Fuckall. I don't see the muay thai guys and the kung fu crowd sitting up and taking notice. Judo? Kano had asked R. H. "Pop" Moore Sr to devise suitable Olympic rules and weight classes as far back as 1932. And yes, Geesink's prowess undoubtedly hastened the spread of weight classes, but it would be a mistake to see it as a revolution.http://www.judoinfo.com/bruno2.htm

Here's the thing- I completely agree that he was a notable martial artist, and he's worth mentioning in my book because he basically single-handedly destroyed the myth of "size does not matter, ever, technique and spirit will always win" to those who were there to witness the mass destruction that Slomanski brought upon the unsuspecting japanese karateka, also kind of forcing the introduction of weight classes. Problem is however, in the scale and reputation in which you're comparing to someone like Rickson Gracie.

Don't get me wrong, I make a pretty terrible Gracie nutrider. But, in my view, Slomanski fails to match up in terms of 1. Reach 2. Public Perception.

Rickson, Royce were at the crest of the MMA revolution, brining their family's style of fighting to the public in mass numbers, changing public perception in terms of the usuability of grappling in a full-contact match. Media (thanks to modern times), general success in the public and private forum, never-ending word of mouth... so much reach, so much overall respect from a large number of people.

Hank, on the other hand, was not covered much at all in comparision (once again, times), and is truthfully, an often-missed figure in the world of martial arts, regardless of the fact that he was thought of as the third most feared thing by japanese people, right after 'Fat Man' and 'Little Boy.' Instead, by a large percentage of the small number of people who know of him, he is better known as the guy who taught Elvis karate. Sad, really.

So no, not dissing the guy, but I disagree on the level on which he was influential.

Though you try to say it, you miss the impact that the media has today in Martial Arts. The Gracies are only known because of the popularity of MMA on cable television, which reaches millions of people instantly. Hank Slomanski had the local newspaper, which may have had a circulation of tens of thousands. Huge difference.

Even Bruce Lee had to deal with the fact that television was just beginning to reach the masses on a level approaching cable television, but without the same coverage or number of channels. His method of reaching the public was through film, yet still, he did not have coverage equal to the Gracies.

The impact of a Hank Slomanski was international, not just national. Yet, he was not known to the masses anywhere. He caused some of the greatest karateka to change.

The Gracies brought back the popularity of a forgoten art. Not to say that the impact of bringing JuJitsu back into the folds of the martial art world was a small thing. The Gracies were after all trained in Japanese JuJitsu and then started adding in locks that had not been used in generations or were modifications of existing locks, then named it Gracie JuJitsu, in the finest traditions of martial arts. They impact the Gracies brought to martial arts was that you can never, ever neglect the ground game.

But, those who have been paying attention to the martial arts scene have noticed that clinch fighters can destroy ground fighters. Yet, there is no current rush to understand this. Clinching is the best way to negate a ground game, outside of breaking glass onto the ground and saying, "I dare you to grapple now."

And so what if he trained Elvis Presley. If you had read anything about Hank Slomanski, you would know that he was probably one of the toughest martial arts teachers in the business. People like to make fun of the fact that Elvis knew martial arts, but would you have made fun of Steve McQueen, Kareem Abdul Jabar or James Coburn? Elvis was no *****, he grew up in a tough area of the United States for the time he was alive. He got his ass beat down in his first match in Hank Slomanski's studio, and still kept getting up. He was sent there by Ed Parker to train, before Ed Parker would even consider training him. Ed Parker did that because he knew if any man could hang with Slomanski, then he was indeed serious about the arts. Basically, most people had the same opinion about Elvis at that time as you do now, but Elvis proved himself, and you proved you don't know **** about it. I doubt you could do situps and have a 260 lb man run across your abs at the same time, which was a standard Slomanski drill.

Hyperpoble, no. Recognition of historical events not noticed by others, yes. Hank Slomanski deserves the recognition of his accomplishments. He was one of the toughest amongst the tough men of the time. There was not internet, cable or world wide television coverage to show his awesome accomplishment like there is today. He changed the martial arts approach of an entire nation which was the place Karate originated, how can that not be on par with the accomplishments of those who were able to take advantage of an ever shrinking world in which communication became instantaneous.

Last edited by Bolverk; 10/04/2007 11:19am at .

Knowing it is not enough, we must apply.
Willing is not enough, we must do.

Never approach a Bull from the front, a Horse from the rear, or a Fool from any direction!

Though you try to say it, you miss the impact that the media has today in Martial Arts. The Gracies are only known because of the popularity of MMA on cable television, which reaches millions of people instantly. Hank Slomanski had the local newspaper, which may have had a circulation of tens of thousands. Huge difference.

And you're still missing that his achievements had little relevance outside of karate.

Originally Posted by Bolverk

Even Bruce Lee had to deal with the fact that television was just beginning to reach the masses on a level approaching cable television, but without the same coverage or number of channels. His method of reaching the public was through film, yet still, he did not have coverage equal to the Gracies.

A vastly greater number of people have heard of/seen Bruce Lee in action than have heard of/seen a Gracie. So, no.

Originally Posted by Bolverk

The Gracies brought back the popularity of a forgoten art. Not to say that the impact of bringing JuJitsu back into the folds of the martial art world was a small thing. The Gracies were after all trained in Japanese JuJitsu and then started adding in locks that had not been used in generations or were modifications of existing locks, then named it Gracie JuJitsu, in the finest traditions of martial arts. They impact the Gracies brought to martial arts was that you can never, ever neglect the ground game.

You fail at history.

The Gracies were trained in judo by the Kodokan-educated Maeda. There were no forgotten arts being resurrected - the judo ground game was a relatively new development, and was supplemented by catch wrestling techniques Maeda had picked up on his travels. If you even took the time to read a BJJ book by a Gracie, you'd learn that what you just said was bollocks.

Originally Posted by Bolverk

But, those who have been paying attention to the martial arts scene have noticed that clinch fighters can destroy ground fighters. Yet, there is no current rush to understand this. Clinching is the best way to negate a ground game, outside of breaking glass onto the ground and saying, "I dare you to grapple now."

This is true if and only if you have a sufficiently strong ground game that your opponent cannot risk going to the ground with a vastly inferior position. Without training in the ground range, you have a huge hole in your game which is easily exploitable.

Originally Posted by Bolverk

Hyperpoble, no. Recognition of historical events not noticed by others, yes. Hank Slomanski deserves the recognition of his accomplishments. He was one of the toughest amongst the tough men of the time.

No, he really wasn't. The "tough men of the time" included Kimura and Helio Gracie. Some guy kicking ass in an art that isn't generally considered all that respectable here in the pre-Oyama days is small beer compared to the Brazilian Vale Tudo circuit of the time.

Originally Posted by Bolverk

There was not internet, cable or world wide television coverage to show his awesome accomplishment like there is today. He changed the martial arts approach of an entire nation which was the place Karate originated, how can that not be on par with the accomplishments of those who were able to take advantage of an ever shrinking world in which communication became instantaneous.

Only, y'know, he didn't, 'cos judo was a much more established part of said nation's martial arts approach and his victories meant nothing in that context.

He made waves in one art, and that an art that is today most known for being riddled with bullshit and bad instruction. Unlike judo and BJJ, at no point did this art establish a noteworthy pre-eminence over other arts. In that sense, he's less relevant than Geesink, and we'd still call it hyperbole if you were saying it about Geesink.

...Anyway, this estimation of his ability would go on to prove that old style martial arts was just plain Bullshido when compared to an American competitor.

Doesn't this just prove that that Hank Slomanski was good at "old style martial arts" and was a quick learner. I don't really see how his "American-ness" played into it; did he defeat his opponents with bicameral representive democracy, or maybe Coca-Cola... gigantic steel cars with fins?

Originally Posted by Bolverk

Hank Slomanski entered the competition floor and waited his turn. The next thing that happened was the complete and utter destruction of the Japanese martial arts myth that size does not matter, because superior technique and spirit will prevail!

After Hank Slomanski bowed in for his match he began to systematically vanquish his opponents one after the other. He fought for 4-5 hours, bowing in, fighting a fresh opponent and then bowing out. He defeated each opponent by a full point, no half points. They were using a system that had no rounds and a match would end with a "ippon", full point, or two half points, regardless of time. Many of his opponents were knocked out, because a 130 pounder does not stand up so well against a 230 pound pure fighter who is in excellent condition. At the end of the first day, he was undefeated.

It's certainly a reasonable assumption (but not necessarily true) that his "technique" was inferior to at least some of his opponents but I'm really flabbergasted at how fighting continuously for "4-5 hours" against a stream of rested opponents and emerging undefeated is a demonstration of anything but "superior spirit" prevailing.

So, after detailing how he trained in "old style" martial a Japan you then reach this conclusion?

Sorry, but your logic is broken.

Excuse me? First, you must apply logic before you can say the logic is broken. One of Japan's greatest fighters admitted that he had to go to American, learn the culture and adjust his training, starting over, because of one man's accomplishment. Why? Because technique did not compensate for size as the Japanese believed.

My logic is broken, puh lease....

Knowing it is not enough, we must apply.
Willing is not enough, we must do.

Never approach a Bull from the front, a Horse from the rear, or a Fool from any direction!

"The situation is best summed up by Shigeru Oyama, a student of Masutatsu Oyama, and also a fighter who had completed the 100 kumite, 100 straight wins in succession. He said, "I studied culture and technique (when I came here) because if I fight a 150-pound man in Japan and a 220-pound man here, the same technique does not work. You have to change how you generate power. Timing is everything. The power changes. I started everything over."

Seems the best in Japan changed their training methods, kind of negates your response.

And by the way, Kano began Judo by removing techniques from JuJitsu. He then took the Black Ribbon used to designate advanced swimmers and applied the concept to Judo, creating the Black Belt. He did not change the way people trained.

Knowing it is not enough, we must apply.
Willing is not enough, we must do.

Never approach a Bull from the front, a Horse from the rear, or a Fool from any direction!